From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0DC35A72 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:12:49 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id l126so71710836wml.1 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:12:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type; bh=1R7Cc90tXWmHzekMvQZwR5Jq91uZgwqW6+pvZH3Cgpc=; b=1irHXhDpPy4cTNwhAgcIAHO7s5ig3rlOkl5HN0kG4caYuNDHlRH6xKQzkBLicluOaE MIhRl9umBWxlvLvP8nNiQ00YckMRg+bKl6ATe2a/bXBWOcN8uEYXIK/kinA4ug4AFnNQ Ln9OPsO021IDitEJbjv7bA7GH9ZYL9NY65USCmATKczgCtMvTeIwH3x6R8yJLI/66ikj HUC83HlcQfw3TVL4W9X1VPao6ThhGs73mhOM7ZULNiXQ5t533nPv+nxavsyXGwauLbcF D7bQALz9gWQZEngMUdJ3jiu24cE2nq8psCiB1k6kX8yub/vyJCH7h35Wgl32y4rSxVK+ 7vew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=1R7Cc90tXWmHzekMvQZwR5Jq91uZgwqW6+pvZH3Cgpc=; b=ZWsR4J5bziR0msQ0y5uWjOnclzPiOlI95Cesv4GZAiXoBeQkLwIpUeRy9L3swRS7Vg xZLrGx6AI9LcUcOjLecL5gy9TmIYmVAolUEXkS+Gq0Slns7n0TuWo1uPyr3pxUqkK2WT iK/u6qfI+nFA2A148V9Itog2XjP5CqGMlSv9Ttw3MMiKhjZbmtg/vo0mrhFUVJI+s0NV yIo/NPIhP40kHh1zTHB3g2zkijEjk7eJ3qvJEKU0fe+GFoyAMnZ4P8WMLL6JNpKBgK0p QGgpoyH+troU9CFIKC5SgbsdZUJh829o4ECxiRqmgPGCfjBxWrgxOWGs0MD57t0xcGFX Gt4A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnlSvIX61N+RhLFgcGuFnLjSVKJGDkQaeBo0KEu7JmecymJo7Q2bjG1d1CEHd29eNyZHkmnDgO4ZNnkkCNaM8RGPp/1rA== X-Received: by 10.28.137.138 with SMTP id l132mr3929531wmd.21.1450455169766; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:12:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q77sm7216565wmd.22.2015.12.18.08.12.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:12:48 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:11:33 +0100 Message-ID: <1561631.aijrKaNmiP@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20151218121145.GB11116@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1450350991-27817-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <20151218121145.GB11116@bricha3-MOBL3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] version: 2.3.0-rc0 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:12:50 -0000 2015-12-18 12:11, Bruce Richardson: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:16:30PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > --- > > lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_version.h | 6 +++--- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_version.h b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_version.h > > index bb3e9fc..6b1890e 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_version.h > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_version.h > > @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ extern "C" { > > /** > > * Minor version number i.e. the y in x.y.z > > */ > > -#define RTE_VER_MINOR 2 > > +#define RTE_VER_MINOR 3 > > > > /** > > * Patch level number i.e. the z in x.y.z > > @@ -70,14 +70,14 @@ extern "C" { > > /** > > * Extra string to be appended to version number > > */ > > -#define RTE_VER_SUFFIX "" > > +#define RTE_VER_SUFFIX "-rc" > > > > /** > > * Patch release number > > * 0-15 = release candidates > > * 16 = release > > */ > > -#define RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE 16 > > +#define RTE_VER_PATCH_RELEASE 0 > > > > /** > > * Macro to compute a version number usable for comparisons > > What about the discussion about the numbering of DPDK versions in future? The > latest suggest which was +1'ed a number of times was to use an Ubuntu-style > YY.MM naming scheme. I don't think there was any objections to such a scheme > so is it not premature to start naming the new release now using the old scheme? Before doing any change on master, it is better to change the version number to avoid confusion with the previous release. Example, the generated doc does not show 2.2 anymore. About changing the numbering, no problem, it can be changed at any time before the RC1. At the moment there was a proposal for YY.MM and a proposal for 3.0. Even the YY.MM needs more discussion as it is not clear if we should use 15.03 or 15.04 for the release ending at the end of March. It seems reasonnable to expect a release the next day, i.e. in April.